Future of Sky Procycling
Comments
-
adr82 wrote:
"Dominant stage-race team"? "Imploding"? Sky were nowhere much before 2012. They were of course dominant in 2012. Then they not unexpectedly maybe had a bit of trouble living up to that very high standard in 2013, while still having a very good season. Now they're having a "bad" season. One bad season. A bad season that isn't even over yet! And yet already some of you are acting like they've been on a rapid downward spiral for the past 5 years and are completely unaware of the problems that they've been having, some of which have been unpredictable and impossible to avoid. I'm struggling to understand exactly what you expect from Sky... a flawless repeat of 2012 every year, disregarding changing opposition, a changing roster, injuries, illness, weather, parcours and of course simple luck??Macaloon wrote:
And you are a mind-reader? If the dominant stage-race team (Plan C came 2nd in 2013 Giro) of the last few years imploding as a force isn't interesting to you, that's fine. No need to suggest people are thick.Above The Cows wrote:You seem to think riders are machines.
If 2015 turns out to be a repeat of 2014 for Sky, I think that would be the point when serious questions start to be asked, not now. If there are systematic problems to be dealt with I'm pretty sure a team like Sky is aware of them already.
Also worth remembering no dominant team ever stays dominant forever. I really shouldn't have to point that out but given what's being said in this thread it's probably worth stating.
You seem to think that if there are problems then Sky are already aware of them, but that we're not allowed to ask if there are problems. You simultaneously concede that there might be a systemic issue, but don't allow others to question whether this might be so. I don't think anyone expects a repeat of the 2012 annus mirablis, where they won almost everything they turned up to race. I wouldn't dismiss 2011 entirely though, they took the Dolphin and two podium spots on the vuelta.
It may well be all down to bad luck so far this season. But to put it down to luck without asking if there was anything that could be changed for the better, whether any of that bad luck could have been avoided, that would be complacency. I don't think DB is the complacent type.
Their stage season isn't a right off, and the GT season isn't over yet. But I think they'd have been hoping for a better ROI than they've had so far and will be asking questions themselves.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Weren't the team doing fine until their leader crashed?Macaloon wrote:Plenty of people pointed to Sky's team as their primary weakness this tour. That was a forecast that came true.0 -
nic_77 wrote:
Weren't the team doing fine until their leader crashed?Macaloon wrote:Plenty of people pointed to Sky's team as their primary weakness this tour. That was a forecast that came true.
Thomas has been amazing. All Tour. In 11 stages since Froome crashed there's been ample scope for the team to shine. Am I just being impatient? You'd think a team ready to bludgeon Astana and Saxo could show a bit better when unleashed?...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
RichN95 wrote:
But that's a different situation. The leader in those sitations is equivalent to the lead DS or general manager. That's why sparkling personalities like Bjarne Riis are successful. In the actual team, the leader first and foremost has to be the best rider.OPQS wrote:Above The Cows wrote:And who says a great leader needs to be charismatic?
That's my opinion, based upon over 20 years of professional life. A Leader doesn't need to be charismatic to be effective (they can lead through fear for example), but my experience is that a leader is more effective if they are charismatic. I except that's anecdotal, but I'm not sure how else to answer that.
No, I've experienced Leaders in a work setting of roughly a Team size. It applies equally.
I'm not sure I buy your last sentence either. The Leader simply has to make the best use of his available resource to achieve the desired result. An example in the cycling context being the 2012 TdF. Wiggins wasn't the best rider, but he was the Leader and used the Team available to make sure he won.0 -
nic_77 wrote:
Weren't the team doing fine until their leader crashed?Macaloon wrote:Plenty of people pointed to Sky's team as their primary weakness this tour. That was a forecast that came true.
Then they were doing fine until another member of their team crashed and had to abandon. Then they were still doing fine, sitting 2nd on GC in fact until that member got sick.Correlation is not causation.0 -
You have to do that all the time. Even the most successful seasons are full of shortcomings. The key is filtering the real issues from the misfortunes. Success hides issues, failure overstates them.No tA Doctor wrote:It may well be all down to bad luck so far this season. But to put it down to luck without asking if there was anything that could be changed for the better, whether any of that bad luck could have been avoided, that would be complacency. I don't think DB is the complacent type.Twitter: @RichN950 -
-
What's this "not allowing" stuff? I'm not trying to prevent anyone asking questions (as if I could anyway?), I just think there's a somewhat ridiculous focus on the problems Sky have to the virtual exclusion of other teams. I don't understand why this is. Is it because they're nominally British? Is it because they're "supposed" to be dominant after 2012? Is it because they're somehow more fun to bash than anyone else? Is it because they're not supposed to leave anything to chance? Is it because a Sky team car once ran over someone's dog? Please explain this to me, seriously. One bad season doesn't automatically make them a bad team.No tA Doctor wrote:You seem to think that if there are problems then Sky are already aware of them, but that we're not allowed to ask if there are problems. You simultaneously concede that there might be a systemic issue, but don't allow others to question whether this might be so. I don't think anyone expects a repeat of the 2012 annus mirablis, where they won almost everything they turned up to race. I wouldn't dismiss 2011 entirely though, they took the Dolphin and two podium spots on the vuelta.
Never said it was all down to luck... it certainly played a part, but of course it wasn't the only factor.No tA Doctor wrote:It may well be all down to bad luck so far this season. But to put it down to luck without asking if there was anything that could be changed for the better, whether any of that bad luck could have been avoided, that would be complacency. I don't think DB is the complacent type.
Yes, I agree completely. My question is why so many are behaving like the entire team is basically falling apart in front of our eyes? "Imploding" was the word used a few posts ago. They're not imploding, or even close to doing so.No tA Doctor wrote:Their stage season isn't a right off, and the GT season isn't over yet. But I think they'd have been hoping for a better ROI than they've had so far and will be asking questions themselves.0 -
On a course with 100km of time trialling he was.OPQS wrote:I'm not sure I buy your last sentence either. The Leader simply has to make the best use of his available resource to achieve the desired result. An example in the cycling context being the 2012 TdF. Wiggins wasn't the best rider, but he was the Leader and used the Team available to make sure he won
And he was, by pretty much everyone's assessment, a lousy leader of men.Twitter: @RichN950 -
adr82 wrote:
The thing is that many people here seem to have much higher expectations of Sky than they do themselves. Not to mention a strange sense of almost personal annoyance/disappointment when Sky don't do well that doesn't appear to apply to any other team.Coachb wrote:If Froome wins the Vuelta that will go some way to putting things right for Sky's high expectations.
He will have his hand full though. Its a lot of pressure.
I agree. spot on. Some of the sky fans seem to expect victory and when they don't, the excuses pile out instead of admitting that the loss was due to a better rider. It's a form of self help so they can get through the day
I like Valverde. Call him a doper , He was. Call him a cheating wheel sucker, IMO he's riding smart. But at the end of the day I doubt he will make the podium and it will not effect my life one bit and there is no annoyance or disappointment involved only a extra little bit of joy if he wins anything,,,,,,,,not much though 0 -
I also used 'creamed', which I prefer. Other teams had the distraction of the Giro. Rogers had 2 days notice he was riding it. Sky withdrew their GC guy to reinforce the Tour squad. They've gone from targeting both GTs, putting Plan C on the podium in one, to being nowhere in both. If that's not a dramatic reversal, what is?adr82 wrote:
Yes, I agree completely. My question is why so many are behaving like the entire team is basically falling apart in front of our eyes? "Imploding" was the word used a few posts ago. They're not imploding, or even close to doing so.No tA Doctor wrote:Their stage season isn't a right off, and the GT season isn't over yet. But I think they'd have been hoping for a better ROI than they've had so far and will be asking questions themselves....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
RichN95 wrote:
On a course with 100km of time trialling he was.OPQS wrote:I'm not sure I buy your last sentence either. The Leader simply has to make the best use of his available resource to achieve the desired result. An example in the cycling context being the 2012 TdF. Wiggins wasn't the best rider, but he was the Leader and used the Team available to make sure he won
And he was, by pretty much everyone's assessment, a lousy leader of men.
The Tour is 100KM long now?
I think by his own assessment it was something he struggled with and didn't enjoy. That said, he achieved the result. I think, in the round, there's little doubt that BW is more charismatic then CF, but balanced against that is the negative, draining side of his character which is a detriment to effective Leadership.0 -
No, they didn't. He pulled out because he hadn't finished a race since February. He was schedule to do the Giro and the Tour.Macaloon wrote:Sky withdrew their GC guy to reinforce the Tour squad.
You seem to think they can magic up Grand Tour riders at a moment's notice. Porte was ill, Henao sidelined, Uran left for more money, Wiggins no longer interested. There's a limited supply of talent.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Since Rich has already responded to your main point, I just have to ask: did you lose money or something when Sky didn't do anything in the Giro?Macaloon wrote:
I also used 'creamed', which I prefer. Other teams had the distraction of the Giro. Rogers had 2 days notice he was riding it. Sky withdrew their GC guy to reinforce the Tour squad. They've gone from targeting both GTs, putting Plan C on the podium in one, to being nowhere in both. If that's not a dramatic reversal, what is?adr82 wrote:
Yes, I agree completely. My question is why so many are behaving like the entire team is basically falling apart in front of our eyes? "Imploding" was the word used a few posts ago. They're not imploding, or even close to doing so.No tA Doctor wrote:Their stage season isn't a right off, and the GT season isn't over yet. But I think they'd have been hoping for a better ROI than they've had so far and will be asking questions themselves.0 -
No, that's not what I said was it.OPQS wrote:RichN95 wrote:
On a course with 100km of time trialling he was.OPQS wrote:I'm not sure I buy your last sentence either. The Leader simply has to make the best use of his available resource to achieve the desired result. An example in the cycling context being the 2012 TdF. Wiggins wasn't the best rider, but he was the Leader and used the Team available to make sure he won
And he was, by pretty much everyone's assessment, a lousy leader of men.
The Tour is 100KM long now?Twitter: @RichN950 -
OPQS wrote:RichN95 wrote:
On a course with 100km of time trialling he was.OPQS wrote:I'm not sure I buy your last sentence either. The Leader simply has to make the best use of his available resource to achieve the desired result. An example in the cycling context being the 2012 TdF. Wiggins wasn't the best rider, but he was the Leader and used the Team available to make sure he won
And he was, by pretty much everyone's assessment, a lousy leader of men.
The Tour is 100KM long now?
I think by his own assessment it was something he struggled with and didn't enjoy. That said, he achieved the result. I think, in the round, there's little doubt that BW is more charismatic then CF, but balanced against that is the negative, draining side of his character which is a detriment to effective Leadership.
I think being image conscious and getting drunk and acting like a tw%5 does not make you charismatic.
It just gives you something to compere to.
Cipo his charismatic ....0 -
RichN95 wrote:
You have to do that all the time. Even the most successful seasons are full of shortcomings. The key is filtering the real issues from the misfortunes. Success hides issues, failure overstates them.No tA Doctor wrote:It may well be all down to bad luck so far this season. But to put it down to luck without asking if there was anything that could be changed for the better, whether any of that bad luck could have been avoided, that would be complacency. I don't think DB is the complacent type.
Absolutely. Which is why Macaloon was looking at the 2013 tour team and I was questioning Froome's protection. It's not all hindsight :-)
I have fairly high expectations of Sky, I expect to see them at the sharp end of the GC (definition: a reasonable shout of a podium) in the third week of all GTs, or if that's not gone to plan then the minimum of bagging a couple of stages. And that's pretty much where they've been since the 2011 Vuelta, up until the 2013 Vuelta. That was the last GT they won a stage (just the one). Their Giro plans were disrupted, now their Tour has unluckily fallen apart. There's a question about the strength in depth of their roster hanging in the air there.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
RichN95 wrote:
No, they didn't. He pulled out because he hadn't finished a race since February. He was schedule to do the Giro and the Tour.Macaloon wrote:Sky withdrew their GC guy to reinforce the Tour squad.
You seem to think they can magic up Grand Tour riders at a moment's notice. Porte was ill, Henao sidelined, Uran left for more money, Wiggins no longer interested. There's a limited supply of talent.
But if Uran wasn't replaced by a rider of equal talent, and Wiggins role wasn't filled, then that's a management issue. Neither factor could come as a surprise to DB, surely?Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Who are you going to replace them with then? Really good GC riders rarely come on the market, charge premium wages, don't really want to learn a language, and what assurances over leadership roles, which they won't get with Froome there (and Sky want them to be guaranteed clean too). It's not like playing a velogames fantasy leagueNo tA Doctor wrote:RichN95 wrote:
No, they didn't. He pulled out because he hadn't finished a race since February. He was schedule to do the Giro and the Tour.Macaloon wrote:Sky withdrew their GC guy to reinforce the Tour squad.
You seem to think they can magic up Grand Tour riders at a moment's notice. Porte was ill, Henao sidelined, Uran left for more money, Wiggins no longer interested. There's a limited supply of talent.
But if Uran wasn't replaced by a rider of equal talent, and Wiggins role wasn't filled, then that's a management issue. Neither factor could come as a surprise to DB, surely?Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
Who are you going to replace them with then? Really good GC riders rarely come on the market, charge premium wages, don't really want to learn a language, and what assurances over leadership roles, which they won't get with Froome there (and Sky want them to be guaranteed clean too). It's not like playing a velogames fantasy leagueNo tA Doctor wrote:RichN95 wrote:
No, they didn't. He pulled out because he hadn't finished a race since February. He was schedule to do the Giro and the Tour.Macaloon wrote:Sky withdrew their GC guy to reinforce the Tour squad.
You seem to think they can magic up Grand Tour riders at a moment's notice. Porte was ill, Henao sidelined, Uran left for more money, Wiggins no longer interested. There's a limited supply of talent.
But if Uran wasn't replaced by a rider of equal talent, and Wiggins role wasn't filled, then that's a management issue. Neither factor could come as a surprise to DB, surely?
Well perhaps the money spent carting Wiggins about would have been better spent on keeping Uran happy? I know Sky want wiggins for the exposure, but maybe they're paying a high price for it, in more ways than just financially. Unless he's taken a massive pay cut, of course.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Froome crashed out of the Tour, end of story. A tentative plan B, as in most teams, the next best on GC, If they are a realistic proposition, as was Porte till he got ill, takes over protected rider status. Thats what he did.
Bad luck? It happens. As for Saxo winning a stage being there plan B, I think not. I can imagine Riis before the Departe saying "Right, you there, If Bertie has a bad one or gets injured, you win a stage, right?"
So Sky have had a bad Tour, Its not the end of the world. Murdock must be laughing all the way to the bank, do well or do badly all some people on here can talk about is Sky Procycling. :roll:0 -
I think Brailsford may end up getting one of the young French Climbers. Sky need to freshen up. Porte ,Thomas are and always have been great domestics and nothing more. Froome needs some new input and team mates.
While they are at it get some decent new bikes as well.0 -
mike6 wrote:Froome crashed out of the Tour, end of story. A tentative plan B, as in most teams, the next best on GC, If they are a realistic proposition, as was Porte till he got ill, takes over protected rider status. Thats what he did.
Bad luck? It happens. As for Saxo winning a stage being there plan B, I think not. I can imagine Riis before the Departe saying "Right, you there, If Bertie has a bad one or gets injured, you win a stage, right?"
So Sky have had a bad Tour, Its not the end of the world. Murdock must be laughing all the way to the bank, do well or do badly all some people on here can talk about is Sky Procycling. :roll:
Mike They have just won another stage ....Come on it's not bad going is it.0 -
RichN95 wrote:
No, they didn't. He pulled out because he hadn't finished a race since February. He was schedule to do the Giro and the Tour.Macaloon wrote:Sky withdrew their GC guy to reinforce the Tour squad.
You seem to think they can magic up Grand Tour riders at a moment's notice. Porte was ill, Henao sidelined, Uran left for more money, Wiggins no longer interested. There's a limited supply of talent.
That's ridiculous. Take a pop at Sky and all of sudden I'm a moron? Is this the Clinic?
Their nominated GC contender for the Giro, riding the Tour with no Giro in his legs is not reinforcing the Tour squad? How so?...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
I do think it's an unfair advantage that the team can afford to effectively ignore the second biggest race on the calendar. Makes the Tour performance look worse is my point.adr82 wrote:Since Rich has already responded to your main point, I just have to ask: did you lose money or something when Sky didn't do anything in the Giro?...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
RichN95 wrote:
It may have been a side effect, but it wasn't the reason for it.Macaloon wrote:Their nominated GC contender for the Giro, riding the Tour with no Giro in his legs is not reinforcing the Tour squad? How so?
I don't know how you can be so categoric. It's possible that Porte preferred to shelter Froome rather than face Quintana....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
All the teams do the same number of races and have about the same number of riders. It's up to them how they spread their resources. Sky didn't ignore anyway. Their intended GC leader got ill and not as you seem to believe for tactical reasons (after all after DNFing in every race in the prior two months he was bang in form)Macaloon wrote:
I do think it's an unfair advantage that the team can afford to effectively ignore the second biggest race on the calendar. Makes the Tour performance look worse is my point.adr82 wrote:Since Rich has already responded to your main point, I just have to ask: did you lose money or something when Sky didn't do anything in the Giro?Twitter: @RichN950 -
argyllflyer wrote:
You must be one of the one's we'll be shot of after the 18th September.
Like mike6 said it's all personal perception really
"Arran, you are like the Tony Benn of smut. You have never diluted your depravity and always stand by your beliefs. You have my respect sir and your wife my pity"
seanoconn0
